[Terrapreta] Agrichar trialled in field at Wollongbar

[Michael J. Antal, Jr.]

Dear friends: the VM content of cellulose is about 90% but it does not
dissolve in terpentine.  Need I say more?  Michael.

Michael J. Antal, Jr.
Coral Industries Distinguished Professor of Renewable Energy Resources
Hawaii Natural Energy Institute
School of Ocean and Earth Science and Technology (SOEST)
1680 East-West Rd., POST 109
University of Hawaii at Manoa
Honolulu, HI 96822

Phone: 808/956-7267
Fax: 808/956-2336
http://www.hnei.hawaii.edu

  -----Original Message-----
  From: terrapreta-bounces at bioenergylists.org
[mailto:terrapreta-bounces at bioenergylists.org]On Behalf Of Sean K. Barry
  Sent: Tuesday, April 24, 2007 5:01 PM
  To: Tom Miles; 'terrapreta'
  Subject: Re: [Terrapreta] Agrichar trialled in field at Wollongbar


  Hi Tom,

  I believe that volatile matter in charcoal is all easily dissolved by
turpentine.  Turpentine is itself one of the liquids, which are distilled
from wood (a fractional distillate).  Turpentine might however be left on
charcoal if you were to attempt to wash VM from the char.

  The ASTM standard D1762 measures VM% on w/w basis weight.  It does not use
a solvent and the actual VM is lost in the test procedure
  (it evaporates).  So it will only get at the weight of the VM or VM% of
the charcoal on a w/w basis.

  Maybe a procedure could be developed to wash VM from charcoal with
turpentine, measure the weight of the VM which was washed out, and actually
have the VM (in solution with the turpentine).

  1) Dry a pulverized charcoal sample at 105 degrees C for some hours (or
until it no longer loses weight).
  2) Add a measured (weight) amount of turpentine to the charcoal (for a
wash) in a sealed container.
  3) Weigh the wash solution with the charcoal together after some period of
washing agitation.
  4) Pour out the wash solution (containing turpentine and VM)
  5) Drive off the turpentine left on the charcoal by bringing its
temperature up to the boiling temperature of turpentine for some minutes.
  6) Weigh the cleaned (of VM) and dried (of turpentine) charcoal.
  7) The weight of the VM should then be;
      weight of wash solution and charcoal (step 3) - weight of cleaned and
dried charcoal (step 6) - weight of turpentine (step 2)
  8) The Volatile Matter itself will be in solution with the turpentine in
the post wash solution.

  If the procedure was tried on duplicate samples, one with ASTM D1762 and
one with the test procedure I proposed, then the resulting %VM numbers could
be compared.  If they match closely, then I think it would be safe to say
that the total measurable VM can be "washed" from the charcoal sample by
using the procedure.

  I think this could work.  Then the actual VM could be further analyzed.
This presumes that the turpentine does no chemically react with the VM
(other than to dissolve it).  I'd welcome any comments from anyone who might
think it won't work for any reason.

  Regards,

  SKB
    ----- Original Message -----
    From: Tom Miles
    To: still.thinking at computare.org ; 'Sean K. Barry' ; 'terrapreta' ;
'Michael Bailes'
    Sent: Tuesday, April 24, 2007 6:53 PM
    Subject: Spam: RE: [Terrapreta] Agrichar trialled in field at Wollongbar


    Duane, Sean, Michael,



    These are good references. The ash composition of the woods, grasses,
pulping residues, sludge, etc. will carry varying quantities of nutrients to
the degree that they are retained in the char. Through studies like these we
know more now about the volatility of the inorganics (K, S, Cl) during
pyrolysis, gasification and combustion.



    I was referring primarily to measuring the volatile matter (VM) that is
apparently available to the organisms which is what Steiner must have been
referring to as the bio oils that are retained in the char. If a char has
10%,  20% or 40% VM is it all available to the organisms or some portion?
How do we measure that? Is the VM that is available soluble in a dilute
acid?



    Tom







    From: terrapreta-bounces at bioenergylists.org
[mailto:terrapreta-bounces at bioenergylists.org] On Behalf Of Duane Pendergast
    Sent: Tuesday, April 24, 2007 7:04 AM
    To: 'Sean K. Barry'; 'terrapreta'; 'Michael Bailes'
    Subject: Re: [Terrapreta] Agrichar trialled in field at Wollongbar



    Sean, Michael



    This work from Denmark seems relevant under this topic. A site search on
the authors names indicates it has not been discussed here.




http://pubs.acs.org/cgi-bin/abstract.cgi/enfuem/2005/19/i04/abs/ef049739a.ht
ml



    Duane





    -----Original Message-----
    From: terrapreta-bounces at bioenergylists.org
[mailto:terrapreta-bounces at bioenergylists.org] On Behalf Of Sean K. Barry
    Sent: April 23, 2007 11:50 PM
    To: terrapreta; robert.prince at ngia.com.au; Michael Bailes
    Subject: Re: [Terrapreta] Agrichar trialled in field at Wollongbar



    Hi Michael,



    Interesting article.



    Tom Miles was asking earlier this evening about other ways to measure
charcoal.  That article had a few reasonably good suggestions I thought ...

    "We will also measure the nutrient content of the agrichar, particularly
calcium and magnesium, its cation exchange capacity, pH and changes to
microbial activity and microbial biomass."

    I would also suggest a "pH buffer" capacity measurement.  This is
something Richard Haard mentioned the other day as a measure of soil. I
think he suggested including this type of measurement for soil enhanced with
charcoal.  Your highlight in the article, Michael, "... paper mill waste
applied at a rate of 10 tonnes per hectare raised the soil pH by one unit,
making the soil 10 times less acid." points out the value of "buffering"
acidity and/or alkalinity, which charcoal can provide, when added to soils
which swing away from the ideal (is that neutral pH = 7.0?).

    This quote -> "Char itself has a high fertiliser value, depending on its
source.", I would like to discuss.  It seems to me, even if charcoal has
some nutrient content when it is made (and it may well have, since charcoal
is made from biomass), that when and if these nutrients become available for
uptake by plants, then they would soon be depleted, perhaps in a few seasons
of plant growth and harvesting.  But, "Terra Preta" soils are centuries old
and had been there (are still there) for many many years (again centuries).
So, any original fertilizer (plant nutrient) content in charcoal, one put
into the soil and having crops grown on it, would have been depleted long
ago.  Therefore, if the "Terra Preta" soils still retain their fertility,
then there must be something about the charcoal in the soil which helps the
soil maintain it's fertility.  There also must be a continual application of
nutrient containing charcoal and/or plants nutrients from another form,
either organic plant materials (composts) or other sources of plant
nutrients (N, P, K, S, Ca, Fe, Mg).

    I think I have repeated this list, (N, P, K, S, Ca, Fe, Mg), like 100
times since I have been making posts to this site.  A "Plant Propagation"
professor I had a few years back told use to remember all the "required"
plant nutrients by a phrase.  It includes the 3 organic elements from air
and water (Carbon, Hydrogen, Oxygen) and the 6 or 7 organic elements
(Nitrogen, Phosphorus, Potassium, Sulfer, Calcium, Iron, Magnesium, Iodine)
found in soils "See (C) HOPKINS CaFe Manager(Mg)".

    Regards,

    Sean K. Barry
    Principal Engineer/Owner
    Troposphere Energy, LLC
    11170 142nd St. N.
    Stillwater, MN 55082
    (651) 351-0711 (Home/Fax)
    (651) 285-0904 (Cell)
    sean.barry at juno.com

      ----- Original Message -----

      From: Michael Bailes

      To: terrapreta ; robert.prince at ngia.com.au

      Sent: Tuesday, April 24, 2007 12:10 AM

      Subject: [Terrapreta] Agrichar trialled in field at Wollongbar



      This is the first time I have seen anything on agrichar in a Oz
agriculture.
      Paper mill waste has up to 70% water content. You would not get much
free electricity from in a pyrolysis process  unless you added some wood
waste as well..
      Paper mill waste is now dumped in landfill were it produces methane, a
greenhouse gas.

      The emphasis and underlining in the article is mine.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: /pipermail/terrapreta_bioenergylists.org/attachments/20070424/1392711b/attachment-0001.html